Finally, should we trust Labour Force Statistics which involve gender?

The Analysis

As you’ve gathered, this week my makeover was inspired by questioning the orignal chart. The chart itself is ok as far as stacked bar charts go. I question the boldness of the claim, though.

First of all, lots of the EU countries have higher levels of work than the US.

Secondly, as More or Less discussed this week, there are many reasons why gender data in employment statistics might be incorrect. Or, if not incorrect, the surveys are bias against female employees. For example, surveys often ask about “primary” employment. This ignores second jobs, which more women have than men. Uganda changed its surveys and female employment numbers went up by hundreds of thousands!

What did I like about the original?

A stacked bar is pretty clear.

I can easily find the categories on the legend and compare countries

What didn’t I like?

Everything’s got the same intensity. I’d have softened the borders, axis lines and labels, so that the data is more clear

It’s a good job I know my country abbreviations. GER, ITA? Some people might not know what they mean. They may think OECD is a country of its own.

There are too many tick marks on the axis. I don’t need all that information.

The title, “Female hours worked relatively low” doesn’t make much sense. I don’t mind using abbreviated language in titles, but this one seems to have gone too far.